d by this legislation.
If the circumstances should warrant such a course, the authority which
withholds such privileges from any of the places mentioned in the law of
1880 can confer the same without the aid of a new statute. This position
is sustained by an opinion of the Attorney-General, dated in February,
1885.
If the legislation now proposed should become operative, the privileges
extended to the city of Omaha would still be subject to the proviso
attached to the seventh section of the law of 1880, and such newly
granted privileges would be liable to immediate withdrawal by the
Secretary of the Treasury.
Thus, if the design of this bill is to restore to the city named the
privileges permitted by the law of 1880, it seems to be entirely
unnecessary, since the power of such restoration is now fully vested
in the Treasury Department. If the object sought is to bestow such
privileges entirely free from the operation of the proviso above
recited, the language of the bill does not accomplish that result.
I understand that the Government has not now at Omaha "the necessary
officers for the appraisement of merchandise and the collection of
duties," which by such proviso are necessary in order to secure to any
place the advantages of immediate transportation. In the absence of such
officers the proposed legislation would be nugatory and inoperative.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 8, 1886_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I herewith return without approval a bill numbered 3019, entitled "An
act to increase the pension of Abigail Smith," which bill originated in
the House of Representatives.
This proposed legislation does injustice to a very worthy pensioner who
was on the pension roll at the time of the passage of the law which
took effect on the 19th day of March last, and by virtue of which all
pensions of her class were increased from $8 to $12 per month. Under
this law she became entitled to her increased pension from the date of
its passage. The bill now returned allows her the same amount, but if it
became a law I suppose it would supersede her claim under the previous
statute and postpone the receipt by her of the increase to the date of
the passage of the new law.
She would thus lose for nearly two months the increase of pension
already secured to her.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 8, 1886_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return without my appro
|